<?php
/**
 * <https://y.st./>
 * Copyright © 2015 Alex Yst <mailto:copyright@y.st>
 * 
 * This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
 * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
 * the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
 * (at your option) any later version.
 * 
 * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
 * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
 * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
 * GNU General Public License for more details.
 * 
 * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
 * along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org./licenses/>.
**/

$xhtml = array(
	'title' => 'Scrapping current progress on default',
	'body' => <<<END
<p>
	I think perhaps the glitch biomes I set up are too gimmicky.
	In fact, pretty much all the work I did on default yesterday should be thrown out.
	I tried to make default as much of a standalone module as I could and stripped it down to the bare bones, including only nodes that are hard coded into the engine (if default were not hard coded into the engine, I wouldn&apos;t include a default module at all).
	I see now though that if I am going to implement default as a way to obtain nodes from Minetest&apos;s minimal game in a non-gimmicky way, I&apos;m going to have to make my version of default be semi-reliant on retro_plus, the module in which I&apos;m stashing all the nodes from Minetest&apos;s default that don&apos;t belong in Minetyst&apos;s default.
	So now the question is this: do I want to scrap the retro node biomes and integrate all the retro nodes into the regular game or do I want to keep the rare retro biomes but implement them in a more sane way? I could even set up a common biome with some of the more common retro nodes such as stone and water, while setting up rare nodes such as poptart cats in the way they were originally written (scattered everywhere and ignoring biome lines).
</p>
<p>
	I worked on transitioning the bones module today.
	It honestly didn&apos;t take as much effort as I anticipated.
	When bones were first added to Minetest, they had a lot of stupid issues, mostly due to one of the developers being unwilling to accept patches to fix said issues.
	It seems that either he loosened up or people submitted alternative patches that he liked better, because the bones module no longer has any real issues.
	The only changes I needed to make were to make bones play nicely with other modules in Minetyst due to differences in how Minetyst is set up.
	I might make further enhancements later in order to semi-preserve the names of the dead when bones are collected, but aside from that, no further work should be required here.
</p>
<p>
	Next I worked on the buckets module, which has some quirks.
	To dump the liquid from a bucket, the you try to place the bucket.
	That is counterintuitive to me.
	I think of the bucket as a tool that carries the liquid, so I think to use the &quot;use&quot; key, not the &quot;place node&quot; key.
	Even more confusing is the fact that I now added an option to place the bucket itself, so now placing the bucket and dumping the bucket are done with the same key.
	In the old days, dumping buckets used the intuitive &quot;use&quot; key, but I guess for many people, that didn&apos;t seem like the right key to use either.
	For user convenience, I&apos;ll keep things in line with the current convention, but if I find others that agree with me as to which key should be used to dump the bucket, I may change it.
</p>
<p>
	My <a href="/a/canary.txt">canary</a> still sings the tune of freedom and transparency.
</p>
END
);
